Originally posted by WhiteAlice
That is an rather awkward use of the term "mortally wounded", which is generally associated with death of a victim. However, he's not really misusing
the term "mortal wound" at all. A mortal wound is one that threatens life but can be survived with prompt medical attention. It's a wound that
threatens the loss of life, not assures the loss of life 100% of the time. So, technically, Giffords WAS mortally wounded and if it hadn't been for
medical intervention, then she would have died due to a mortal wound. However, she survived and became simply wounded. Mortal, as an adjective, means
liable or subject to death. It's an implication of extreme severity as well. One can hold mortal fear but that doesn't mean that they are going to
die from that fear. They are simply extremely afraid.

Gotta love the English language in all its infinite complexities. Totally agree with the prior posters' remarks about Biden's use of clips though.
They are magazines--not clips!

Thank you, thank you, thank you. It was driving me crazy that nobody seemed to know that. Doesn't anyone read anymore? It's a context issue and the
fact that she is alive is exactly how you know that he meant serious or severe.

You're welcome, you're welcome, and you're welcome! I'm just one of those jerks that will actually correct grammatical and spelling errors while
playing an online video game. There's a slur for people like me.

People tend to be overly critical of elected officials' word usage and ability
to elucidate their meanings. Bush was a huge target for this kind of thing and, as much as I can't stand the guy's positions on ANYTHING, I also
recognize that he may very have issues with aphasia as someone who has problems with aphasia (better yet, grammar/english nazi who sometimes can't
remember what a book is called--ha!). When you're in the limelight, everything you do is put under a microscope and can be twisted and turned by one's
detractors. Bush and Quayle became "idiots" because of their verbal accidents. Same thing technically going on here with Biden.

Originally posted by coltcall
Can we all get a straight face any more with these socialist?

They're not socialists, they're liberals.

Please stop insulting socialists.

Socialism is the last thing they want, the last thing any government wants. They want liberalism, because it is no threat to the status-quo, it does
not appose capitalism or the state.

Socialism was a labour movement for worker ownership, it's not a form of government, it is an economic system that requires no government.

"Anarchism is stateless socialism" - Mikhail Bakunin

"Liberalism is not socialism, and never will be" - Winston Churchill, Liberal Party candidate for Dundee, 1908.

edit on 3/21/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)

They are not liberals either . . . Liberals would be infavor of individual rights and liberties. Liberals are not Collectivists, which they clearly
are.

They are only "liberal" to those that want to legislate/regulate morallity . . . which would also be a excerise in Collectivism, as would Socialism.
So, whether you call them Socialists, Progressives, Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, Communists, or Facists . . . there is nothing "liberal" or
"liberating" about their policies and actions.

So you do not want the precedents set by other Presidents/Vice Presidents brought up? You only want a Biden Bashing thread? My apologies. May I
suggest next time you add a disclaimer in your OP stating that fact so as to avoid any confusion.

That's the sort of hyperbole that has been common now in almost anything said about Obama or Bush and it's beyond simply tired and old. As I've
recently found? This actually goes both directions.

Mention Obama, Biden or staff? A certain group will bring up Bush within the first couple replies ..if not the #1 point made out the gate.

Mention Bush? That side will bring up Obama and his crew, likewise, within the top points, if not as THE top point in mitigation and argument of a
point made about only one man, time period and Presidency.

It's the unbreakable connection both sides insist on making. Obama is in his SECOND term. He owns EVERYTHING within his direct power and duties at
this point as much as Bush owned EVERYTHING by 2004, if not much sooner.

Bringing up the past every time the present is referenced is a red herring argument the size of a great white shark. Not everyone is still equally
amused by the distractions. :shk:

What I've illustrated is that the ramifications for my mistakes are far different than those of a politician.

QED

Really?

Don't you think that the mistakes we make as fathers/mothers, husbands/wives or members of the local community have much more serious ramifications
everyday than some nutbag politician that can't use the proper words?

Aren't lives effected dramatically when the plumber loses his job for a mistake they made, or the lunch guy is shut down because of mistakes they
made?

I'd say that the truth is quite the opposite. Your mistakes are far more detrimental to your daily life than any dumb politician or his lack of verbal
eloquence.

She got a second chance at life and now is using that incident to try and f/k everyoe elses lives.. I had a friend who got hit by a truck yesterday
leaving two children behind.. I'm sure they are wounded also and much more than these a/holes.

Agree. Biden is funny to watch. I think Bush Sr. was the last VP with serious intellectual horsepower. Cheney lost points for accidently shooting
someone in the face, but absent that he was sharp..although evil. Quayle was likely the most frightening person to be a "heartbeat" away from the
big seat...And in my opinion GW was the most gaffe prone President we have had in my lifetime.

It's the unbreakable connection both sides insist on making. Obama is in his SECOND term. He owns EVERYTHING within his direct power and duties at
this point as much as Bush owned EVERYTHING by 2004, if not much sooner.

Bringing up the past every time the present is referenced is a red herring argument the size of a great white shark. Not everyone is still equally
amused by the distractions. :shk:

If we were discussing policy or current events, I would agree. I get tired of the "Bush did it" and before that the "Clinton did it" too.

Your thread however. is about the VP making an unintentional verbal blunder. And while I agreed with you in my first post I was also pointing out that
this happens all the time to anyone who speaks publicly.

But far be it from me to derail your Biden Bashing thread by pointing out the human frailties of us all.

In fairness you brought up Biden as "Vice President of the United States" ...his position being critical to your OP.

Would it not be fair to compare him to others that have help that position? Or is the position of VPOTUS off limits? While Biden is not? Because I
thought his position is what the OP critique rested upon?

Kind of like talking about wether someone is a good heart surgeon, while not being able to mention the records or surgical outcomes of other heart
surgeons?

For humors sake, yeah. As I understand it, if the Antichrist should ever actually grace Mankind with his malodorous presence......one of the steps
we're supposed to see does involve a seemingly fatal head wound that he returns from, seemingly unchanged or seriously harmed.

Just for the sake of argument though, by that stage? I believe my readings also indicated it was far far too late to just be realizing it. lol...

Let's put statements in their context since the writers of history have twisted them, shall we?

Reagan's Outlawed Russia and we begin bombing in 5 minutes was a quick joke for a sound check before going live with a speech. It was recorded and he
did the joke with a straight face until the very end.

Quayle's "Potatoe". As VP he was congratulating the winner of the spelling bee and teasing the kid.

Quayle's Murphy Brown statements were an example of a single mother that the majority of the people could relate to since it was a popular TV show.
The parts out of context was when the show and Candice Bergen ran with it treating it as a serious comparison in that Quayle did not know the
difference between real life and TV. Oddly enough Candice Bergen's father was Edgar Bergen the ventriloquist of the doll Charlie McCarthy and had his
biggest success on radio and film where you cannot see him and where multiple takes and other movie magic could cover for his poor skills as a
ventriloquist.

Geo W Bush owned his multitude of gaffes and slip ups, but don't let him fool you because he was actually a very eloquent speaker. So much in fact he
was considered "stiff" during his for foray into politics. A campaign that he lost and in review decided to "act more common" to gain appeal. So
some of those Bushisms, were indeed faked by old Dubya himself.

But in the end, I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Indigo, I started the thread but I don't own it. None of us own our threads after we hit the big Submit button and wish it well out in the big bad
world. I've sure made a couple comments over my many threads when something was taking a turn it was clear might lead to T&C territory and the closure
of it, if carried much further ...but this is hardly that.

Can I not point out the annoyance so many feel in seemingly being unable to even say the names Biden or Obama without IMMEDIATELY hearing the name
Bush or Cheney or Rove in the next breath by someone in or near attack mode?

You're entitled to your opinion and have at it on the thread. I'll not be one to say anything beyond voicing my opinion, like everyone else. Again, I
really HATE "taking ownership" of my own threads to make topic comments and I'm not here, by any means. I've just voiced my opinion about how tiresome
it gets.

I sure didn't mean that to be taken as "The Op" making a topic reminder.

Hey Rabbit...Sometimes us "liberals" compare stated views by "right wingers" in the context of past presidents to try and suss out sincere views
verse the pervasive..."everything Obama does is evil" perspective.

Otherwise...Yes Biden is goofy and gaffe prone..sure, no one wants him as President...otherwise he wouldn't have lost the nomination to Obama...but
if having him a "heartbeat" away from being President scares you....Did having Pres. GWB actually as President scare you? Did you fear
Quayle's position...

Otherwise...no one is looking to excuse Pres. Obama or VP Biden...just looking to test the sincerity of the OP position....Once upon a time the
President was hammered by the right wing for months...for giving his wife a fist bump...and since then it hasn't eased up much....so questioning
whether someone would feel the same way if it was a GOP VP? That seems a fair question that could easily be answered? For me my goof-ball list
includes Pres. GWB, VP Quayle, VP Biden and VP Cheney...I am obligated to include Cheney cuz he shot a man in the face. I also didn't like Gore much,
but I just think he unlikable, not neccessarily gaffe prone.

Well, now you ask a couple specific questions and I can get my teeth into something. (chomp).

I'll focus on the main one you seem to bring up though. Was I nervous to have GWB in office? No. I wasn't actually. It wasn't because I had any
faith in HIM, either. I'd read books describing him during his first term as something like a bubble headed bleach blond of the worst stereotype when
economic topics of almost any kind came up. He also had all the tactical and strategic brilliance of a 10 year old playing dodge ball.

The reason all that could be true and I still wasn't terribly worried during MOST of GWB's terms (That sure changed about half way through the
second one when he went postal on our system) was that he had the intelligence and wisdom to surround himself with people far more intelligent and
capable than he was. He didn't seem to suffer the little napoleon complex that some do when inferior to others in some major way. He WAS and he
seemed to realize it. His had squat for experience at the level it HAD to be. SO...... He found people who DID have it.

Obama, from what I have watched, has surrounded himself with people he either IS superior to in intellect and charisma, or who he believes he is. It
means, if the guy in the center falls, all fall with him. That wouldn't have been the case with Bush...so it's a whole different world now. I wish
Obama would have done the same GWB and Clinton too, for that matter, had done. Hire the BEST they could find ...who could still manage the required
loyalty to the administration. Obama seems to put the latter trait FOREMOST...and skill? Well.. They can learn it as they go or something.....?

It's a bad bad way to run one of, if not still the most powerful nation on Earth. We may lose that spot ..and soon too. At the moment though, we are
looking at the United States being a nation that is basically run by and formed around ONE man by virtue of the talent, or lack or talent, to those he
chose to run everything beneath him.

...........and Biden couldn't hold a match to Obama's level of ability. Whatever I think of Barack Obama? I'll not sell him short on general
ability to handle what he chooses to make his priorities. It's what he CHOOSES that I have total opposition to, pretty much all the time anymore.
Such are the breaks.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.